Why the long faces about Houllier?

[Toronto Villa]

No. I just don't have a downer on it like you do because I don't see it as big a concern as you clearly do. Then again, outside of Mourinho or Wenger you'd have found fault in anyone we would have hired. And how much experience of England did Mourinho or Wenger have before they led their respective sides to incredible levels of success. Didn't seem to hamper them did it? In fact I'd be scared to death at your reaction if we were about to hire some bloke managing a team in Japan. You'd melt down.

Calm down TV. What I've actually said is that, as dave suggested, he's probably only going to be here for a year or two at the most so it's difficult to get either too enthusiatic or too despondent about it. I don't think Houllier's absence from the English game is something than can be so easily dismissed as you are doing. But to say "the game hasn't changed that much" when the exact opposite argument was used in defence of O'Neill's record is laughable.

I'm perfectly calm and I don't want to get into a pissing match with you. We can debate this maturely.

MON had been completely out of the game when he joined to Villa. Houllier has been in the game so even if he doesn't have an intimate knowledge of the PL since 2004, he's still actively involved in watching the game. So how much has "the game" in England really changed since 2004? Are teams no longer playing 4-4-2 or 4-5-1? Are players no longer overpaid? Is the money no longer stupid? It was stupid back then and it is now. Have we now reached a different technical level that wasn't there in 2004? What exactly has changed in your opinion that would make him a dinosaur coming back into the game today. Serious question.

As I said, I clearly don't put as much stock into his absence from the game in England as you do. And my point about Mourinho or Wenger is that they had never in their lives managed in England, yet it had no little or no bearing on their ability to do well. In fact if anything, you could argue Houllier has a step up on them even if he isn't as talented which nobody is going to contest.

[Chris Smith]

Houllier hasn't managed in England for 6 years.  Only last season, MON supporters were telling us how much harder it is to achieve a 6th place finish now than it was when O'Leary did it.  Which was 6 years ago.

While you were telling us it was a piece of piss, so no doubt the new man will do it while at the same debating existentialism and smoking a Gitanes in the dug out.

Rubbish, what I said was that 6th was the least we should have expected given the unprecedented level of money and control that O'Neill had.  That he spunked a lot of it up the wall, insisted on not using his squad properly and only knew one tactic are the reasons we never got any higher. Not that those drawbacks ever seemed to bother you.

In any case, the point I'm making is that if you believe the league is harder now than it was 6 years ago then saying "the game hasn't changed that much" doesn't wash, as TV has done in order to dismiss concerns that Houllier's six years out of the English game might possibly be a handicap.

Oh, sorry I was giving a flippant answer to what I saw a fliappant post. I didn't realise you were being serious. If you want to fight old battles you go ahead but I'll claim my cliche bingo winnings for "spunked ... up the wall".

[Chris Smith]

just wondering mate

i have had a season ticket now for 13 years and dont miss any home games and get away when i can and buy every home and away shirt so i can say i put a fair bit of money into the villa

I just think i have the right to be fooked off when this sort of appointment is made.

OH SHIT WHILE I WAS WRITING THAT I REALISED SOMETHING.... HOULLIER SIGNED HESKEY FOR LIVERPOOL....YOU DO REALISE THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE HE WILL PLAY EVERY GAME ........

You've had a season ticket since before you were born, good going.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

OH SHIT WHILE I WAS WRITING THAT I REALISED SOMETHING.... HOULLIER SIGNED HESKEY FOR LIVERPOOL....YOU DO REALISE THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE HE WILL PLAY EVERY GAME ........

The prick who managed us previously did his best to play him in every game, even to the point of sidelining the much better goal threat of Carew.

[Toronto Villa]

I was having a bit of a laugh with the 'Heskey for £11m' thing.  But that having been said it was top dollar back then for a return of 39 goals from 150 games, which is around 1 in 4.  An eye for a player is an eye for a player, regardless of age, so he can be forgiven for paying more or him due to his age, but not for signing him in the first place.

Look, I'm not about to defend Heskey because I wish we were rid of him. But when you sign players, you expect them to live up to expectation at the very least and hopefully exceed them. In Heskey's case, in year one at least he lived up to the transfer fee. It shoudn't be discounted that the year after Heskey scored 23 goals for Liverpool, they sold Michael Owen to Real Madrid. they worked brilliantly together for Liverpool and England. Ultimately, he's well past his sell by date, and we need to bring in some new forwards to challenge Gabby.

[hilts_coolerking]

All I would say is that those who defended O'Neill's record by saying that it was a lot harder to finish 6th now than when O'Leary did it are those who should be stating how the game has changed and after they've done that have a go at explaining why those changes won't make any difference to a man who hasn't managed in England for 6 years.

[Concrete John]

I was having a bit of a laugh with the 'Heskey for £11m' thing.  But that having been said it was top dollar back then for a return of 39 goals from 150 games, which is around 1 in 4.  An eye for a player is an eye for a player, regardless of age, so he can be forgiven for paying more or him due to his age, but not for signing him in the first place.

Look, I'm not about to defend Heskey because I wish we were rid of him. But when you sign players, you expect them to live up to expectation at the very least and hopefully exceed them. In Heskey's case, in year one at least he lived up to the transfer fee. It shoudn't be discounted that the year after Heskey scored 23 goals for Liverpool, they sold Michael Owen to Real Madrid. they worked brilliantly together for Liverpool and England. Ultimately, he's well past his sell by date, and we need to bring in some new forwards to challenge Gabby.

I wouldn't ask you to defend him or either managers decision to sign him.  But going back to our discussion over the relative merits of Houllier and MON, I think both rating the bloke is at least an indication that there may not be a huge amount of change under our next manager.

Martin signed Heskey - so did Gerrard.
We're crap to watch - Houllier is quite defensive in his approach.
Martin signed some crap players - Cisse.

It's just one of the factors that goes to my contention that we'll be no better off under him then we were with Martin!

[Concrete John]

All I would say is that those who defended O'Neill's record by saying that it was a lot harder to finish 6th now than when O'Leary did it are those who should be stating how the game has changed and after they've done that have a go at explaining why those changes won't make any difference to a man who hasn't managed in England for 6 years.

I don't think the game has changed as much as there are now better teams around.  We've had large investment and are competing, Spurs have got their act together, Everton are stronger and then there's Man City.

No dramatic changes like if we compared now to 20 years ago, but it is more competitive.

[Toronto Villa]

I was having a bit of a laugh with the 'Heskey for £11m' thing.  But that having been said it was top dollar back then for a return of 39 goals from 150 games, which is around 1 in 4.  An eye for a player is an eye for a player, regardless of age, so he can be forgiven for paying more or him due to his age, but not for signing him in the first place.

Look, I'm not about to defend Heskey because I wish we were rid of him. But when you sign players, you expect them to live up to expectation at the very least and hopefully exceed them. In Heskey's case, in year one at least he lived up to the transfer fee. It shoudn't be discounted that the year after Heskey scored 23 goals for Liverpool, they sold Michael Owen to Real Madrid. they worked brilliantly together for Liverpool and England. Ultimately, he's well past his sell by date, and we need to bring in some new forwards to challenge Gabby.

I wouldn't ask you to defend him or either managers decision to sign him.  But going back to our discussion over the relative merits of Houllier and MON, I think both rating the bloke is at least an indication that there may not be a huge amount of change under our next manager.

Martin signed Heskey - so did Gerrard.
We're crap to watch - Houllier is quite defensive in his approach.
Martin signed some crap players - Cisse.

It's just one of the factors that goes to my contention that we'll be no better off under him then we were with Martin!

1) Both signed Heskey at very different stages of their careers. Houllier's signing of Heskey to play alongside Owen was a very good decision. That as I pointed out, fell apart as soon as Owen left. Heskey since then hasn't played with a player of Owen's movement and quality. Again not defending Heskey's entire body of work, but that is important to point out. He needs a great player like Owen or Rooney to be productive.

2) We were crap to watch at home, and for the most part great away. We weren't always crap to watch under MON. That's a myth. Houllier is defensive in his philosophy first and foremost. So is Mourinho. You can win things being conservative which is the most important thing. I'm not going to pretend we're getting Wenger football any time soon.

3) All managers sign good players, crap players, ones that turn out great and ones that were great at the time and turn out shit. Cisse turned to be in the final version. Highly thought of at the time, young, fast and dynamic. He turned out to be a complete nut. How do you really know (insert Sasa Curcic story here)

[abc123cox]

OH SHIT WHILE I WAS WRITING THAT I REALISED SOMETHING.... HOULLIER SIGNED HESKEY FOR LIVERPOOL....YOU DO REALISE THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE HE WILL PLAY EVERY GAME ........

The prick who managed us previously did his best to play him in every game, even to the point of sidelining the much better goal threat of Carew.

Houllier also sold Heskey!

[pmk1981]

OH SHIT WHILE I WAS WRITING THAT I REALISED SOMETHING.... HOULLIER SIGNED HESKEY FOR LIVERPOOL....YOU DO REALISE THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE HE WILL PLAY EVERY GAME ........

The prick who managed us previously did his best to play him in every game, even to the point of sidelining the much better goal threat of Carew.

i know,  scares the crap outa me

...phil thompson .....

bloody hell :-(

[Ads]

What is so bad about Phil Thompson pmk?

[Concrete John]

1) Both signed Heskey at very different stages of their careers. Houllier's signing of Heskey to play alongside Owen was a very good decision. That as I pointed out, fell apart as soon as Owen left. Heskey since then hasn't played with a player of Owen's movement and quality. Again not defending Heskey's entire body of work, but that is important to point out. He needs a great player like Owen or Rooney to be productive.

2) We were crap to watch at home, and for the most part great away. We weren't always crap to watch under MON. That's a myth. Houllier is defensive in his philosophy first and foremost. So is Mourinho. You can win things being conservative which is the most important thing. I'm not going to pretend we're getting Wenger football any time soon.

3) All managers sign good players, crap players, ones that turn out great and ones that were great at the time and turn out shit. Cisse turned to be in the final version. Highly thought of at the time, young, fast and dynamic. He turned out to be a complete nut. How do you really know (insert Sasa Curcic story here)

I'm not entirely in disagreement with you.  I was just using some of the common anti-MON arguments I see (and not saying they are yours) and seeing how I'd expect Houllier to measure up against them.  As for point 2, I've never really had an issue with style of play, other than needing to break teams down at home more often.

You think he'll do better than Martin and I don't.  I have no problem with that and hope and we see how things develop you're proven right.

[Bosco81]

OH SHIT WHILE I WAS WRITING THAT I REALISED SOMETHING.... HOULLIER SIGNED HESKEY FOR LIVERPOOL....YOU DO REALISE THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE HE WILL PLAY EVERY GAME ........

The prick who managed us previously did his best to play him in every game, even to the point of sidelining the much better goal threat of Carew.

Houllier also sold Heskey!

So did Martin O'Neill

[Toronto Villa]

1) Both signed Heskey at very different stages of their careers. Houllier's signing of Heskey to play alongside Owen was a very good decision. That as I pointed out, fell apart as soon as Owen left. Heskey since then hasn't played with a player of Owen's movement and quality. Again not defending Heskey's entire body of work, but that is important to point out. He needs a great player like Owen or Rooney to be productive.

2) We were crap to watch at home, and for the most part great away. We weren't always crap to watch under MON. That's a myth. Houllier is defensive in his philosophy first and foremost. So is Mourinho. You can win things being conservative which is the most important thing. I'm not going to pretend we're getting Wenger football any time soon.

3) All managers sign good players, crap players, ones that turn out great and ones that were great at the time and turn out shit. Cisse turned to be in the final version. Highly thought of at the time, young, fast and dynamic. He turned out to be a complete nut. How do you really know (insert Sasa Curcic story here)

I'm not entirely in disagreement with you.  I was just using some of the common anti-MON arguments I see (and not saying they are yours) and seeing how I'd expect Houllier to measure up against them.  As for point 2, I've never really had an issue with style of play, other than needing to break teams down at home more often.

You think he'll do better than Martin and I don't.  I have no problem with that and hope and we see how things develop you're proven right.

I don't know if he'll do better than MON from a league position standpoint. Obviously we all hope he is, but a lot of factors will influence that. One will certainly be money. One thing is I hope we can be more savvy in the broader transfer market, and that going that route allows us acquire more technically gifted players. I want Houllier's tenure to push us on to the point where we can win the League Cup final as opposed to just getting there and running out of ideas. Or that we do well in Europe. I think Hodgson showed how having an understanding of European football allowed him to prepare Fulham better. I think we have been quite naive under MON in that regard.

Importantly, I want his time here to put in place some new ideas that will benefit us for many years to come.